The game is the first creative act of the human being, begins when the boy is baby, through bond that settles down between the outer reality, the fantasies and the needs where desires that are acquired learn with taste, creating a bond of wisdom and affection between which it teaches and the one that learns. It is important to indicate that the necessity to play is own of all boy, but has to consider who all of them do not play in the same way, neither to the same games, nor by the same motivations demonstrating that the game is determined by the material conditions of existence, in a concrete context social and historical, being essential to consider the playful thing in the Initial Level like the intergame between individual and social factors that are conditioned mutually in a dialectic relation in which they integrate the educational one, the students, the knowledge and the context. The game in the school: It is not the game, in the educative scope, a smaller activity or of second rank, it either does not constitute a reward or a period of rest with respect to other works; when one falls in the error to conceive it only like an activity of distraction, relaxation or liberation of the tensions produced by the scholastic activities, the school usually exiles to a space and time of second category and students usually do not maintain any relation with the objectives properly. The Initial Level cannot fall in this error, on the contrary, it must integrate the playful activity or the exploratory activity in a proposal that it promotes to please, relation and knowledge acquisition, the students are subject social concrete, carrying of a history and inserted in a determined culture, therefore their values, their expectations, their customs and their motivations will be reflected in their games. The game in the education process and learning: To teach and to learn are equivalent to introduce between the information that the educational one presents/displays and the knowledge that the student constructs (from this information) a third element, traditionally this third element was the method.
As we recently Jose Luis Sampedro, the very idea of economic development is a degeneration. The degeneration of the illusions of reason. Beyond the disagreement among the major economic powers, and knowing that as important as practical proposals is the rehabilitation of values and principles, we should bear in mind what was said by Rahm Emmanuel, Chief of staff of Obama: a crisis should never be missed. If, as the Nobel Paul Krugman has reminded us, Reagan seized the crisis of 1987 to change everything for the benefit of the rich minority, the neoliberal involution, why not exploit this crisis to straighten the path that has led us to the disaster deeply? Restoring ethics, solidarity, justice and respect for the environment, the planet, above the greed, the incessant growth and wastage. In recent years, after the collapse of the Soviet Empire and the miserable victory of capitalism in its disastrous neo-liberal version, its worst consequences were felt with crudeness: rapid collapse of the Argentine economy, increase of the poor, greater impoverishment of already impoverished countries and astronomical growth of inequality between countries and between classes in the countries, among others.
But also there were answers. Protest in Seattle and in all the cities where they met economic elites, birth of the World Social Forum, global opposition to the single thought (the dogma of the Washington consensus), popular social movements in Argentina, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, political awareness of a large NGOs challenge constant to the neo-liberal disorder. Social movements in South America materialized politically and have elected a majority of progressive Governments in the region, Governments that defy the deregulation, absolute freedom of capital, privatization as a panacea and the predatory action of transnational corporations. It is a good way to start changing things, because tests show that no action or pressure from below, there are no changes at the top that merit such a name. Take advantage of the crisis to change things.
Here is where the problems begin. When you finish your work, i.e. when they deliver the balance or financial statements each month and the Director or owner of the company does not simply use them, you are saying indirectly that his work not is useful to the company. This happens to 99.9% of the counters and is essentially due to two issues: 1.-provide information outside of time making them historians accounting of what has already happened. 2.
The information you deliver doesn’t anyone even when they did with every opportunity. The first issue has a solution. Simply, they must work longer hours and deliver the information on time. The second question is more complex in its analysis and we must ask ourselves the following: does what as much quality information that you give as to the employer take appropriate decisions? If information that prepare the new NIF has no built-in, information won’t be useful to the employer. If for example information that you assembled has not incorporated the quantification of labor liabilities (MFRS D-3), or the determination of deferred taxes (MFRS D-4) or where the deterioration of long-life assets, the assets in discontinuity condition or available for sale (NIF C-1), information simply not will serve nobody. In the past three years, CINIF has published a total of 19 new NIF, this is approximately 50% of the current standards for the financial year 2007.
How much know them and used? Let’s change our professional perspective becoming providers of useful information. Let us be active actors in the decision-making process and not simply the historians of what happened or left to spend in the company. As always send them a cordial greeting and invite you to participate in the seminar regulations of financial information where we will see more than 30 standards (since then the 19 new ones). The seminar has an eminently practical approach which may immediately apply it in their work and thus substantially improve the information that Join monthly. It will give me great pleasure count you among the participants to discuss and to delve deeper into these issues.
Despite the global crisis, the mentality of armed clash that took root during the cold war continues to influence much in their concerns and their decisions. For this reason, the speech of Obama in Prague has aroused very diverse and, at times, surprising reactions. The President of the United States proposed to substantially reduce the armament of the members of the nuclear club, until the eventual elimination of all nuclear weapons from the planet. This proposal would help reduce tensions on the globe, apart from deleting a few instruments whose dangerousness nobody goes unnoticed. Yet in recent months has has known incidents between nuclear submarines, equipped with weapons of enormous destructive power, in the course of their patrols of secret surveillance.
Seasoned analysts of international politics have not rested until tick to idealistic naive Obama’s disarmament. They have reproached him an angelic populism, of who holds the status of Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful nuclear arsenal in the world. A pacifist Obama cartoons have been around the world. In the offices of powerful corporations who build complex and expensive components of nuclear weapon systems have been outlined some paternalistic smiles: now put feet on Earth, this naive Prophet of peace!. Because if it fails, you will experience how hard that is to confront half a century preceded the military-industrial complex denounced by a general who is in the White House. The same day that Obama expressed his advanced proposal, a North Korean missile postmarks Japan sky and ended her career in the Pacific, with what he contributed to rekindle the aforementioned mentality of cold war. What was the intention of the Government of North Korea in its missile display?